His true shooting percentage is 3% higher than hakeem's. That's not significant. PER and ORTG are fine but when used in context. Points per 100 possesions is kind of an abitrary stat to use in a vacuum. PER has it's place but I don't think you can just compare PERs and say that person is better is because of their PER is higher. Hakeem absolutely embarrased David Robinson for 6 straight games when they both were at their peaks. Embarrassed. Completely unstoppable on the offensive end. For their careers they put up the same amount of points per game. If you want to call it prettier moves or whatever the bottom line is that when you watch the guys play you will get no argument from any knowledgeable basketball fan that Hakeem Olajuwon had better offensive skills than David Robinson.

The only reason why this came up is because the other guy in his cliff notes to an article said that Olajuwon wasn't as productive offensively as D-Rob which is just wrong. If he would've just said they were even I probably would'nt have said anything.

WTF! How can you sit there and say that? This is just so blatantly wrong! Hakeem, at this peak, scored less points on more shots than Robinson. Not only is this objective it's significant!

Once again, your argument comes down to six games! That's the entire Hakeem Olajuwon argument, too! It's like people realize he was worse statistically, but they just know in their heart of hearts that Hakeem was better so they point to this. I mean, it's close, and people will disagree and give Hakeem the nod, but don't pretend like it's not close when the only argument you have boils down to six games and the fact that you think Hakeem had prettier moves!

Also way to go with the No True Scotsman fallacy. I mean, you realize what you did right? What you just did is say that anyone who disagrees with you on this issue is not a knowledgable basketball fan.

And once again, your only proof of this is that they scored the same amount of points and that he had better "skills." But once again, you don't like certain offensive metrics (like PER and TS%) but you really, really like the one that makes your argument for your (PPG) and the fact that you liked watching Hakeem play.

I mean at this point you're basically getting into the zone of people who thought Peyton Manning and Brett Favre couldn't win the big games or that Barry Bonds couldn't play in the playoffs. You latch onto a narrative and argue relentlessly for it, no matter how dumb the arguments are. Because for whatever reason, the narrative is really, really important to you. It might be some sort of moral thing. IE, David Robinson was "soft" (and therefore wasn't a real man) or it could just be that you're clinging to your memories. Doesn't matter. The point is the case for Hakeem comes down to playoff success (and, really, 6 games vs David Robinson). If you're okay with that, go for it, and we'll agree to disagree. But don't throwout horse-**** arguments.

I probably got into the flame range with my posts earlier so I'll try to make a clearer argument this time.

I think David Robinson is great. I think Hakeem Olajuwon is great too. Personally I don't have any bias toward the other. I'm not from Nigeria, I wasn't in the Navy and I wasn't a Spurs or Rockets fan. Looking at their metrics Robinson had a 3% higher TS% okay what does that mean? Does that mean he was a better offensive player? No. It just means in that one statistic he had a narrow edge. Same with PER and the Offensive Rating. PER has some validity I never totally discounted, but again Olajuwon is right there with Robinson. So the metrics are really close. It's not like Metrically Robinson blows Hakeem out of the water. Now on the court they were both go to guys and got their points. To ignore basketball skills in this argument is pretty silly to me because this is what ultimatley puts the ball int he basketball. Hakeem Olajuwon had better offensive skills than David Robinson. He had better post moves, he could handle the ball better and was quicker. In their careers they avgd the same amount of points and for their 4 highest years they avgd the same (right at 27) so their production was the same. If you guys want to use PER or whatever to make the argument that David Robinson scored the ball a little more efficently than Hakeem Olajuwon then I can go with you on that.

As far as the 95 Western conference finals I'm not going to base my whole argument of why I think Hakeem is better offensively on that but I'm definitley not going to act like it didn't happen either.

Robinson is 3rd I think all time in Def Rating. The guy got dominated by Hakeem in that series. It's nothing new because Hakeem made alot of people look silly. That's one of the points I was trying to make about relying too heavy on metrics, especially defensive ones. In the NBA I don't care who you are, you can not stop the elite scorers and offensive players for any significant time. So no matter what great defender you put on someone if they are elite they are going to get theirs. Hakeem's gonna get his, Jordan's gonna get his, Robinson, Malone, Barkely and on down the line.

So yeah all these metrics and stuff are great but you definitley need to be careful with them.

Again the original comment was that Hakeem wasn't as productive as D-Rob offensively when he clearly is. That was the basic point I was trying to make.

All the stats and metrics on B-ball reference are fine but I think you have to use them in context and they can't be used in a vacuum. With stats like that you are looking for significant differences not tiny ones and there is no massive difference in metrics.

Also I'm not saying that everyone that disagrees with me is wrong I was just saying that I haven't ran into very many knowledgeable basketball fans who think that david robinson possesed the same offensive skills as Hakeem Olajuwon. Take from that what you want.

lol @ Rick R. How is he banned again?

Hakeem's better than Robinson in the same way that Duncan is better than KG (and even while saying this I'm not 100% convinced either of those statements is true). In both cases, it's pretty thin either way, and efficienty tends to favor the latter, but in both cases I feel a bit better with the 1st guy in big games and big moments. Cliche? Sure, but there's a nugget of truth in there somewhere.

No, most of them just go to b-ref and have an argument based on that.

If they were GM;s in the NBA they would draft players looking at their stats without even watching any of them play. Even after they watched them play, they would assume 1 week or 1 workout was too small a sample size and still pick the other player.

I totally agree with what you said, after watching both of them play, whether against each other or against others. It is clear hakeem is better. I wasnt using the 6 games argument, the player TS% ignores the 100+ games they played in the playoffs. Most would even say that each playoff game is worth more than a reg season game.

Also good point with duncan an garnett.

Let's ask Tuq and some of the old timers. I've watched plenty of Spurs/Rockets games in my day, and I can honestly say that it's impossible to compare the two based on watching them play.

They had two different playing styles but were often lumped together, ala KG and Timmay (nice call btw KC). Hakeem was more back to the basket and DRob liked to face up. Both could do either, but this was where they were effective. Defensively, Hakeem wasn't as good 1v1 but was better on the help side.

Honestly, if you think it's not close you're fooling yourself. Personally I like DRob in this format because he had more size and lateral athleticism, and also because a lot of what Hakeem got away with back then would be considered travelling in today's game. Either way they were both awesome.

And LOL at NPP's team he'd put up against Shaq. I know it's been a while, but do you realize just how FREAKING DOMINANT Shaq was? Any offense you can throw at him will be affected in a worse way on the other side of the ball. There are maybe four or five guys that stand a chance with him in this entire league, and only one of them would be considered a superstar (Deke). If my team goes up against Bobbo there's no way I'd put anyone of offensive value on him, because they'd either be wiped out or fouled out.

OH

MY

GOD


Also, when are we starting the vote and such?

No it's close. They are both HOFers. Again what started this whole thing is when someone said Hakeem fell short in offensive production to David Robinson. That's not true. Through out their careers they had the same avg and if you take their top 4 years of production they again had the same avg. So they both got the job done in the reg season. Hakeem's offensive playoff performance where the pressure is higher and you are playing against better players is legendary and much better than Robinson's.

ALSO WTF? @ David Robinson having more lateral atheticism. Are you talking about quickness and side to side movement? If you are Hakeem was faster and quicker side to side and had better feet than David Robinson. Size wise Robinson is listed as an inch taller and their weight is the same. So they are pretty much the same size. When watching the two play I never looked at them and thought "wow Robinson has a size advantage over Hakeem". So yeah I don't really think size is an issue when comparing the two.

You know this argument sucks, and I know you know this argument sucks. Why are you still using it? Yes, in their top 4 seasons, they both averaged 27 points. However, Hakeem shot 2.6 more FGA per game.

From the NBA Season Thread:

wrong on pretty much everything imo.....

3 percentage points in TS is not a "narrow" edge at all. That'd be like saying that a guy who scores 23 points only has a "narrow" edge over a guy who scores 15. One is exceptional and will put you among the league leaders; The other is rather average.

He doesn't blow him out of the water, but its extremely clear that his stats are better. Theres no way to argue otherwise.


You realize that I have better "skills" than Dwight Howard. Am I a better offensive player than him?

Many players get by on their strength, size, and athleticism as much as their skills. Dwight Howard is one example. Others get by with being very smart, constantly in the right position, and always aware. Tim Duncan would be an example here. And finally others get by with their great moves, dribbling, and fakes. Hakeem is an example here. However, you seem to only want to look at the last one. Stats on the other hand will look at the entire story and be completely unbiased.



Its comical that you bash stats in favor of having watched the games, but then you cling to this stat when its not even a good one. Their production was not the same. 3% higher TS is a big and significant difference.


No, it does not appear that you're going with us at all on this or at least you're not understanding the importance of this, as you still seem to think that PPG is the only needed stat.


Six games should be practically meaningless when evaluating two player's entire careers. Maybe David was actually nursing an injury the entire series. Maybe he was sick. Maybe he was having marital problems and it messed him up mentally. I don't know. Or maybe he was perfectly fine and he just got outplayed for 6 games.

The point is that theres simply too much variance that can occur for 6 games for you to base so much of your argument on this. I understand that its not your "whole" argument, but its still contributing far too much to your viewpoints on this issue.



Did you not see where I posted the 42 games in which they played against each other? Hakeem's TS% in those games against DRob was 48.76%!!!!! Thats horrible. I mean that literally- that would make him one of the worst offensive centers in the league if he played that way every game. DRob averaged 3.3 blocks and 2.2 steals when playing against Hakeem.



The irony here is overwhelming because you are the one clearly misusing stats here with your PPG argument.

As for us statheads, we spend a ton of time discussing different metrics and their validity. We aren't just throwing out random stats or evaluation methods without discussing in depth those methods first.


You didn't make that point though. You made the point that Hakeem did better in one six game series, did better in the playoffs, and had more visable "skills". You never showed that Hakeem was more productive.


Again, very ironic. You were the one using PPG in a vacuum. We were looking at the stats as a whole.


The problem is that you havn't ran into very many knowledgeable basketball fans at all. 99% of the casual fans out there have horrible viewpoints on these things and generally misunderstand a ton.

How much basketball do you and biiiichips watch on average each week?

Thats whats so funny about all of this? Some of us statheads are on AIM with each other talking this stuff over everyday. We all have NBA Leaguepass and watch a ton of games, DVRing many of them so we can view them in their entireity's.

We often do learn a lot from watching the games. We often will form some hypothesis from watching the game and then come to the stats for confirmation. We fully realize the limitations of certain stats and what they can tell us.


Yet every single time this debate comes up, we get accused of not watching the games.

No he didn't. Hakeem was the quicker player vertically and even running down the court, but had more trouble guarding big men further out. And you know the weight argument doesn't hold water, because none of those stats are accurate. David Robinson was bigger and stronger than Hakeem.

And god I hate using those 6 games as a reason to put Hakeem ahead. That's similar to calling Melo better than Lebron because he's won most of their head to heads.

Admiral has another key advantage in that he didn't fast every year during the stretch run of the season (though I guess Ramadan shifts year to year so you might get lucky with Hakeem).

I still say it's wicked close and overvaluing playoffs could be problematic. Like I said, there's a nugget of truth in the fact that many of us, even armed with stats, would prefer Hakeem and Duncan over D-Rob and KG, especially in big games and big moments. However, this can lead to some fallacious thinking. Perhaps D-Rob's play leads to less 'big moments' cuz his team just crushes, thus avoiding what amounts basically a coin flip, so it's still a net positive. Sorta like how commentators will say "that's why he's the best" when Kobe or AI or whatever have overall a pretty mediocre or bad game but play well in the final 5 minutes. If they were really the best and were playing like it, the game would have been over far in advance and wouldn't need any buzzer beater heroics.

There is really nothing we can measure who we thought was faster by. I don't recall hakeem being some stiff that couldn't move from side to side though that's all I'm saying. Your argument doesn't make much sense though. So he was faster running down the court and was more explosive getting off the ground but when it came to guarding big men away from the basket he couldn't keep up? Huh? What big men were taking Hakeem away from the basket and abusing him? In Hakeems day all the center play was in the key for the most part. Hakeem had the ability to drift away, the same with robinson. Ewing liked stepping out and shooting jumpers too. Really it just comes down to our own opinions I guess
.
As far as size yeah Robinson was a little bigger and stronger I never denied that.

I watch almost all the Laker games and maybe 2 or 3 of the National games on ESPN/TNT/NBA TV a week. I thought about getting NBA League Pass but
I felt between the national coverage on the other channels that I mentioned give me enough out of market games that I don't really need it.

This is all moot to the David Robinson and Hakeem argument though because they aren't playing any more so how much basketball I do or don't watch at the present time is irrelavent to this argument. At the time that they were playing I watched 3x amount of basketball than I do now. 88-98 or so was my basketball watching hey day.


As far as any watching games comments that I've made are referring to older players. I don't think I've ever directed any of that at you personally but when this draft was going on I could tell that alot of people hadn't seen enough of the older players. That's why you were seeing current day pretty decent players getting over hyped over the same type of player that was in the late 80s or the early 90s.

I don't bash stats. Stats have their purpose. Maybe we aren't watching the same game but last time I checked the goal on offense is to put the ball in the basket. So production offensively is points. In Robinson's 4 highest years and Hakeems 4 highest years they avgd the same exact thing. 27 points. Over their careers their PPG are within a point of eachother. So like is said before their PRODUCTION throughout their careers are the same. That's the only argument I was making.

Their efficency may not have been the same but yes their production is the same.

Maybe you guys should start reading what I say thoroughly. Half the people quoting me aren't even saying any thing directly to what I say. They are just quoting me then going off on some tangent or point that I wasn't even on.

Actually I did make that point. Just because you decided to pick and choose what posts to read and not follow the thread from the beginning of where I made my first statement on the matter isn't my fault.

The funniest part in all of this is that I never once say that Olajuwon is a more effecient scorer than David Robinson or state anything about Olajuwon that goes against the metrics. The metrics have their place and they say what they say.

My 2 points have been....

Their production is the same

Olajuwon was a more skillful offensive player

I still haven't had anyone say anything that is to the contrary to this. I've read alot of attacking and alot of shifting the conversation to something else but still no one has directly addressed the only points I've really been making this whole time.

but you're wrong bigchips. i dont know what else can be said? hakeem was awesome. robinson was more awesome. (shaq was most awesome ) they're all really close tho. i mean, just great great players.

I'm interested in seeing the playoff stats from each of them for there careers since DRob was known as a choker.

Any of u stat nerds got them?

and here comes the Dwight Howard train .

Shaq was clearly the most dominant big man in my generation and yeah he's a slam dunk first pick for big man. No argument there.

All that said do you think Shaquille O'Neal is more skillful offensive player than Hakeem Olajuwon?

I would't call him a choker. he ussually preformed at a pretty high level in the playoffs but he never just had that huge epic playoff run to the Finals when it was his team and everyone was looking to him to carry them. No shame in that though because not very many players do.